Vishnu vs The State Of Tamilnadu
2026 Latest Caselaw 1948 Mad

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 1948 Mad
Judgement Date : 16 April, 2026

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Vishnu vs The State Of Tamilnadu on 16 April, 2026

                                                                   CRL OP(MD). No. 7426 of 2026



                         BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                         ( Criminal Jurisdiction )

                                             Date   : 16.04.2026

                                                    PRESENT

                                   THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

                                        CRL OP(MD). No. 7426 of 2026


                     Vishnu                     ...Petitioner/Accused No.8

                                                      Vs

                     State of Tamil Nadu rep. by
                     The Sub Inspector of Police,
                     CBCID,
                     Trichy District.
                     (Crime No.01 of 2025)
                                            ...Respondent/Complainant
                             For Petitioner:Mr.R.Rama Guru
                             For Respondent:Mr.B.Nambi Selvan
                                    Additional Public Prosecutor

                          PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS
                     PRAYER :-     For Bail in Cr.No.01 of 2025 on the
                     file of the respondent police.

                     ORDER :

The Court made the following order :-

The petitioner / A8, who was arrested and

remanded to judicial custody on 19.03.2025 for

the offences punishable under Sections 179 and

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

180 of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.01 of 2025 on the

file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that on

09.09.2025, at about 01.00 p.m., the first

accused namely, Kandeepan purchased liquor from

the Tasmac shop and gave Rs.500/- and on

verification, it was found that the currency note

was a counterfeit note. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner would submit that the respondent

Police registered a case against the petitioner

and others. He would further submit that only

based on the confession of co-accused, the

petitioner has been arrayed as A8. He would

further submit that no counterfeit currency notes

were recovered from the petitioner and co-accused

was released on bail. The petitioner has been

arrested and remanded to judicial custody on

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

19.03.2026. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the

petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor

appearing for the respondent would submit that

the investigation is still pending and the

petitioner has one previous case. He would

further submit that the offence committed by the

petitioner is against society. Hence, he strongly

opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. This Court heard both sides and perused

the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions made by

the learned counsel on either side, nature of

offence, and only based on the confession of co-

accused, the petitioner has been arrayed as

accused and though the petitioner has one

previous case, the same is not similar kind of

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

offence and in this case, he was released on bail

and no counterfeit currency notes were recovered

from the petitioner and also considering the

period of incarceration undergone by the

petitioner from 19.03.2025, this Court is

inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject

to the following conditions:

[a] Accordingly, the petitioner is

ordered to be released on bail on

condition to execute a bond for a sum of

Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only)

with two sureties each for a like sum to

the satisfaction of the learned Judicial

Magistrate No.II, Karur, and on further

conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before

the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m.,

until further orders.

[c] the petitioner shall not commit

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

any offence similar to the offence of

which she is accused, or suspected, or of

the commission of which she is suspected;

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond

either during investigation or trial;

[e] the petitioner shall not directly

or indirectly make any inducement, threat

or promise to any person acquainted with

the facts of the case so as to dissuade

her from disclosing such facts to the

Court or to any police officer or tamper

with the evidence;

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid

conditions, the learned Judicial

Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take

appropriate action against the petitioner

in accordance with law as if the

conditions have been imposed and the

petitioner released on bail by the learned

Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR

SCW 5560].